Re: Command statistics system (cmdstats) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mark Dilger
Subject Re: Command statistics system (cmdstats)
Date
Msg-id 437B24FD-8741-44B5-9BA7-6FAF1DD11FC3@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Command statistics system (cmdstats)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Command statistics system (cmdstats)  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers

> On Sep 17, 2020, at 5:40 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On 2020-Sep-17, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 01:45:02PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> My spidey sense is tingling here, telling me that we need some actual
>>> benchmarking.
>>
>> This patch has not received any replies after this comment for three
>> months, so I am marking it as returned with feedback.  I agree that
>> this should be benchmarked carefully.

Yes, I have prioritized a couple other patches over this one, with benchmarking this patch lower down my priority list.
Thank you, Michael, for the reminder! 

>
> It seems fine to mark the patch as RwF at the end of commitfest, but
> that's two weeks away.  I don't understand what is accomplished by doing
> it ahead of time, other than alienating the patch authors.

Thanks, Álvaro!  I do not feel alienated, and I hope Haribabu Kommi does not either.

Haribabu, do you have an opinion on which of the two patches should proceed?  I don't recall seeing a response from you
aboutwhether you liked what I did with your patch.  Perhaps you were waiting on the benchmarking results? 

—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company






pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: fixing old_snapshot_threshold's time->xid mapping
Next
From: Josef Šimánek
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Initial progress reporting for COPY command